tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post5011060430981714915..comments2024-03-11T02:32:15.295-04:00Comments on Goblin Artisans: M13 Back on TaskUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-88465832058103779122011-11-24T23:21:37.249-05:002011-11-24T23:21:37.249-05:00Updated the master file (112411) with the comments...Updated the master file (112411) with the comments from the red and white tabs.<br /><br /><br />Dare I ask us to ever so subtly, as we consider different cards and replacements, potentially include a few Defenders? (Maybe wall of spears, who knows! If only kraken hatchling had it.)Pasteurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02058331124653341978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-71515353208694409252011-11-24T10:03:02.810-05:002011-11-24T10:03:02.810-05:00I definitely agree we should have at least two van...I definitely agree we should have at least two vanilla creatures at common in each color, but I wouldn't call any of these cycles. A cycle needs to be tied together by a unifying mechanical theme. "No rules text," while certainly an identifiable attribute, isn't so much a theme as the lack thereof. If they all had the same mana cost or P/T, that would be another story.<br /><br />This half of the discussion is purely semantic though, so yeah, whatever.Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-29253058111829881522011-11-23T17:05:01.569-05:002011-11-23T17:05:01.569-05:00For what it’s worth, all the M# core sets have had...For what it’s worth, all the M# core sets have had two cycles of vanilla commons. I don’t don’t see a good reason to buck the trend. Here’s what was in those set’s cycles and what my suggestion would be for M13.<br /><br />Magic 2010 July 2009 <br /><br />Smaller Cycle Silvercoat Lion (1W 2/2), Coral Merfolk (1U 2/1), Warpath Ghoul (2B 3/2), Goblin Piker (1R 2/1), Runeclaw Bear (1G 2/2)<br /><br />Bigger Cycle Siege Mastodon (4W 3/5), Horned Turtle (2U 1/4), Zombie Goliath (4B 4/3), Canyon Minotaur (3R 3/3), Centaur Courser (2G 3/3)<br />* Green additionally had Craw Wurm Common<br /><br />Magic 2011 July 2010<br /><br />Smaller Cycle: Silvercoat Lion (1W 2/2), Maritime Guard (1U 1/3), Barony Vampire (2B 3/2), Goblin Piker (1R 2/1), Runeclaw Bear (1G 2/2)<br /><br />Bigger Cycle: Siege Mastodon (4W 3/5), Armored Cancrix (4U 2/5), Nether Horror (3B 4/2), Canyon Minotaur (3R 3/3), Spined Wurm (4G 5/4)<br /><br />Magic 2012 July 2011<br /><br />Smaller Cycle: Armored Warhorse (WW 2/3), Coral Merfolk (1U 2/1), Warpath Ghoul (2B 3/2), Goblin Piker (1R 2/1), Runeclaw Bear (1G 2/2)<br /><br />Bigger Cycle: Siege Mastodon (4W 3/5), Amphin Cutthroat (3U 2/4), Zombie Goliath (4B 4/3), Bonebreaker Giant (4R 4/4), Vastwood Gorger (5G 5/6)<br /><br />Magic 2013 Nich’s suggestion:<br /><br />Smaller Cycle: Regal Unicorn (2W 2/3), Shoreline Sorcerer (2U 1/4), Barony Vampire (2B 3/2), Goblin Piker (1R 2/1), Cylian Elf (1G 2/2)<br /><br />Bigger Cycle: Siege Mastodon (4W 3/5), Hightide Serpent (2UU 3/4), Undead Unicorn (3B 2/4), Frost Ogre (3RR 5/3), Alpha Tyrannax (4GG 6/5)Nich Graysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-69063515120164897712011-11-23T15:46:09.352-05:002011-11-23T15:46:09.352-05:00What two cycles of vanilla creatures? I see 1 vani...What two cycles of vanilla creatures? I see 1 vanilla creature in black, 3 in green, 2 in red, 2 in blue and 1 in white. I don't see even one cycle among them.<br /><br />The cycles that we do have absolutely count toward the set's requirements. The Zap cycle are classic reprints. The 'landfall' cycle support the basic-lands matters sub-theme. Not all of the Chasm Drake cycle is top-down, but some are. The lair cycles *are* the set's main theme. The planeswalker cycle will basically be spells the set already needs with proper names attached to them.<br /><br />If there's a cycle or even just a card that doesn't do *anything* for the set as a whole, it should be removed. I don't believe that's the case with any of our existing cycles. If playtesting shows differently, we'll make that change and have learned a lesson from it.<br /><br />I wanted to get a better sense of the set overall before making final decisions on how to execute certain things (like what exactly each type of lair grants). (And I wanted to do the top-down exercise before that.) Now we're about to start serious playtesting that will help us make these decisions.Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-68870724564502569802011-11-22T15:33:34.982-05:002011-11-22T15:33:34.982-05:00@Pasteur I am in total agreement with you as to th...@Pasteur I am in total agreement with you as to the strangling effect cycles of creatures specifically can have. This is another good reason to split the Lair cycle into 5 clockwise Lair Creatures and 5 counter-clockwise Lair Auras.<br /><br />I have been playtesting with seven (7!) cycles at common (French Vanilla Fliers, Small-sized Vanilla, Medium-sized Vanilla, 1-drop EBT Creatures, Planeswalker Cantrips, CW Lair Creatures, and CCW Lair Auras) but because it's not all creatures, it doesn't feel obtrusive. <br /><br />@Jay, we also need to decide on the common Lair effects soon. We can do that at the time when we determine out how to represent Lair at Common. I like Plain Lair first strike so much more than Mountain Lair first strike. (Gnarly Badger is my boy!) <br /><br />Alsom, I am excited to discuss Planeswalkers and splashy Rares soonish. It feels like we've been holding off on what will sell the set for so long.Nich Graysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-42292697912980246162011-11-22T13:40:08.846-05:002011-11-22T13:40:08.846-05:00Hi Jay! I know I've been out for a while, but ...Hi Jay! I know I've been out for a while, but I'd like to do some playtesting. Is the set of commons on wizardsfamiliar.com the most current one?Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10417959233780755818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-76804516285522399112011-11-22T12:47:42.523-05:002011-11-22T12:47:42.523-05:00We currently have two cycles of vanilla creatures,...We currently have two cycles of vanilla creatures, two cycles of lair creatures, a cycle of Chasm Drake-derivatives, and the cantrip cycle.<br /><br />This means five creatures at common are spoken for before we get to any top-down designs, classic reprints, or necessary-mechanics-to-include. (The spell cycle, currently at one out of ten, seems less obtrusive.)Pasteurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02058331124653341978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-74057018365326996412011-11-22T10:46:11.690-05:002011-11-22T10:46:11.690-05:00Pasteur, there are only four cycles at common. Six...Pasteur, there are only four cycles at common. Six cycles _total_, (unless we add the Sovereign cycle—which I hadn't noticed until now).<br /><br />The black planeswalker will definitely get its own post/discussion. At least one, considering how much goes into designing a PW.<br /><br />We should definitely have at least one card in each color associated with that color's planeswalker. We've seen a common cycle paired with an uncommon cycle or with a rare cycle so far. That's probably the way to go, but we shouldn't feel strictly limited to that. It may be fine to have only one cycle and it may be fine for that cycle to not be limited to one rarity.Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-25929361953839769292011-11-22T03:49:23.157-05:002011-11-22T03:49:23.157-05:00Giving out my email is fine, and a Google group is...Giving out my email is fine, and a Google group is a good idea.<br /><br />@Pasteur: We definitely should have Planeswalker's cards, but should discuss whether to have C/U, C,R or something else. The Sovereign cycle in it's current form has some major problems (which Greg pointed out), and I agree that we could do with some black PW discussion, especially because it'll probably affect a black common slot.Juleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13784920130399590671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-87890369210734637012011-11-21T23:10:38.960-05:002011-11-21T23:10:38.960-05:00Also, can we discuss the cycle management within t...Also, can we discuss the cycle management within the set? To me, having six cycles in common does feel a brush too many, but that's my opinion.<br /><br />Do we have a plan for a loose common or uncommon "Planeswalker's"-card cycle? In my drafts I had been pitting the Mountain-Landfall uncommon as Koth's Hammermage, but that might be flawed from the beginning for overlap. (Note- I'm not a fan of the Chasm Drake or Tactician cycles, to be honest, but that's not necessarily important.)<br /><br />At mythic we also potentially have a decent cycle of Sovereigns in the skeleton. The Timmy/Johnny love seems suitable.<br /><br />And lastly, I think we should probably have a discussion on the design of the black planeswalker at some point, but that probably can wait/be its own post. (I have ideas! but don't we all.)Pasteurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02058331124653341978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-66126179448506112872011-11-21T22:55:13.324-05:002011-11-21T22:55:13.324-05:00I do like the moving of the code from a prefix of ...I do like the moving of the code from a prefix of the cardname to the illustrator field.Pasteurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02058331124653341978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-4202371259950779782011-11-21T22:11:50.657-05:002011-11-21T22:11:50.657-05:00Good news is that we can add a code to the Illustr...Good news is that we can add a code to the Illustrator field to keep these sorted better than MSE currently allows. The code is Color-Rarity-Type where type is just C for creature or S for spell or non-creature. By sorting on this field, we can see the cards sorted by color, then rarity, then creatures before spells and then in alphabetical order, much like in a skeleton but with no manual re-ordering.<br /><br />The bad news is this dropbox folder has only existed for two nights and we've already spawned multiple branches of the same file due to simultaneous editing. That's a problem. Wondering if we can use a file management system like Subversion to keep things straight. Let me know if you have any thoughts.<br /><br />Also, core collaborators, I have your emails from when I gave you editing permission for the Google Doc. I'd like to set up a google group so we can communicate more easily, but I won't assume you want your email addresses shared with the others (or that you even want to be on such a listserve). Let me know either way.Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.com